[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: re HD 155229

To: TASS <tass@listserv.wwa.com>
Subject: Re: re HD 155229
From: Michael Koppelman <lolife@bitstream.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 12:19:46 -0500
In-Reply-To: <3D5133FB.7CA3F308@jgws.freeisp.co.uk>
Sender: owner-tass@listserv.wwa.com

Doug West got some V-band photometry of this star:

2452495.591725	8.014
2452495.595278	8.050
2452495.598831	8.012
2452495.602384	8.041
2452495.606042	8.007
2452495.609595	7.973
2452495.613148	8.029
2452495.616701	8.014
2452495.618785	8.047
2452495.622350	7.990
2452495.625903	7.987
2452495.629456	8.030
2452495.633009	8.042
2452498.603241	8.064
2452498.603600	8.081
2452498.603970	8.033

The standard deviation on K-C was around 0.04. The standard 
deviation for the above is 0.03. The second night is a bit 
brighter on average by 0.04 mag. The way it is bouncing around, 
though, does not lead me to believe it is really variable. 
Unless someone else has a different take on this, it seems to me 
we should cross it off the list.

Cheers,
Michael K.

References:
- re HD 155229
  - From: jg <jg@jgws.freeisp.co.uk>

Prev by Date: Rochester Mark IV alive again
Next by Date: Re: HD155229
Prev by thread: August data
Next by thread: Re: re HD 155229
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread